Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p>[quote user="YoHo1975"]</p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <div><img src="/TRCCS/Themes/trc/images/icon-quote.gif" /> <strong>Sam1:</strong></div> <div> <p> </p> <p>The United States federal debt stands at $15.2 trillion.  ....</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div> <p> </p> </div> </blockquote> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p>This is a ridiculous canard. [/quote]</p> <p>Ridiculous?  Canard?  Just the sort of words that encourage discussion of differing points of view.</p> <p>No where have I said that Amtrak is a major driver of the budget.  A line item read of the federal budget, which very few people do, shows that there are thousands of items that contribute to the deficit and debt. Amtrak is one of them, which is what I was trying to say in my previous post.  Again, to a key point from that post. Pouring just a little bit more gasoline on a fire will not put it out. </p> <p>If the nation's airlines and intercity bus companies are expected to earn a profit, why is intercity passenger rail any different?  What is it about Amtrak that says the nation has to have it?  It is not a utility in the sense that local transit is a utility.  Perhaps in a few corridors intercity passenger rail is important for a free flowing transport system, but there are not many of them.  Outside of those corridors it is a nice to have.  The users should pay for the system.</p> <p>Likening NASA to intercity passenger rail is mixing apples and oranges.  NASA was founded to further space exploration.  In part it was designed to make sure that the United States did not fall behind the Soviet Union, especially with respect to the defense implications of being in space. Had the United States, which was the other super power at the time, not committed to space, it could have been at a serious disadvantage vs. the Soviets.  On the other hand, had intercity passenger rail gone away in 1971, with the possible exception of one or two corridors, there would have been practically no impact on the U.S. transport system.</p> <p>A for profit company is driven to do things better, faster, cheaper, with the operative term being better.  To get there it has to focus on its customers, employees, lenders, stockholders, etc.  Drop the ball on any key stakeholder group, and it goes out of business.  A government agency, which in many instances has employees as good as any found in the private sector, does not have this driver.  Clearly, there are some things that are vital for the body politic, and they need to be provided on a societal needs basis.  Amtrak is not one of them.  It or its derivatives should be operated as a for profit business.  Or be allowed to die.  </p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag